Chief Justice Roberts? Really?
The Constitution says that a president-elect becomes the president automatically, at the stroke of noon on the appointed day, meaning that Barack Obama had already been president for a few minutes by the time he took the oath of office.
So the nervous flubs by Chief Justice John Roberts didn't matter -- the misplacing of the adverb ''faithfully'' or saying ''president TO the United States.'' He just goofed by thinking he could recite it from memory, proving that even the strictest constructionist should always write it down, just in case.
Legal scholar Jeffrey Rosen is quoted as saying that Chief Justice William Howard Taft messed it up when he swore in Herbert Hoover -- and as a former president himself, Taft should have known better.
What struck me, though, was the way Roberts ended the oath. The language of the oath, in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution does not include the words ''so help me God.'' Presidents have added that part themselves ever since FDR.
But the Chief Justice, instead of simply stating -- that is, administering -- that phrase for the new president to restate himself, just like the rest of the oath, made it into a question. He posed, ``So help you God?'' as if he were interrogating Obama about whether he does believe in God.
Maybe that was just a nervous outcome of Roberts' earlier gaffes. But the courtroom cross-exam Q-and-A tone of it rang unhappily on the ear.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"Don't Roberts Me, Chief!"
I think it is such a pity that Chief Justice Roberts made such a hash of the oath. From the beginning, he came across as cocky, arrogant and flippant. Also, I felt it was disrespectful of him to say "are you ready to take the oath Senator?" and at the end, to questioningly say "so help you God". I stand to be corrected, but do not think that President-Elect Obama was a Senator at that time. As well as getting the words wrong, he was in too much of a hurry. Such a momentous occasion should have been savoured. One does not hear wedding vows being recited at such speed. He repeated that same rushed speed the second time, even though President Obama stated that this time we will do it really slowly. I say shame on him. Someone in his position should have been able to do a better job of such an important yet simple task. His tone was not right for the occasion. It is troubling that he has his job for a lifetime(for many other reasons) and I think he should have made a public apology for the mess he made.
OK...there is proof now that the right wing spinners are spinning the oath mistake to try to deligitimize Obama's presidency
http://www
I still maintain that Chief Justice Roberts, having worked with words and the meanings and nuances and sequences of words his entire adult professional life, did not just randomly screw up the oath...it was in fact a deliberate attempt to deligitimize this presidency.
However, retaking the oath presumably took the legal ground out from under this ploy; I'd guess that the right wing spinners will just keep on spinning it as long as they can.
I have to say WTF to Chief Roberts! why didn't the dude just bring some notes? I'm glad they retook the oath. I can just see a lawsuit from some conservative group up the road.
A little imperfection can be a good thing in important matters, it hurt to watch, but maybe it's not such a bad thing.
Apropos the Amish and Mennonite quilts; the wise women put a mistake in each quilt because only God is perfect (and probably to squelch the tongue-clucking of their neo-con sisterhood
Let it go. Honest mistake. No conspiracy here. We are all human and we sometimes get nervous during momentous occasions regardless of status in life.
I kind of liked the inflection of Roberts because Obama's response was strong and forthright in contrast. That's not to say that it should be automatically added to the oath. I believe in the separation of church and state. Got that Pastor Rick? Warren couldn't resist in narrowing the Creator (if there is one) down to one tradition (Christianity). I thought Reverend Lowrey got it just right by his ecumenical language. THAT'S how anything like that should be down in a public, "official" setting, IMHO.
The Justice man was intimidated to have a great man in front of him. He got too used to the other one. May that be a lesson from not reading, thinking he is perfect.
Some of us non-Christians take the separation of church and state literally.
I am wondering, as just a thought, not an accusation, if the "goof" of asking President Obama, ''so help me God.'' , could possibly have been prearranged between the two of them prior to giving the Oath of Office??? The reason I throw this out for "thought", good or bad, it that there was such a ruckus prior to the inauguration about weather President Obama would or should even say those words, Rember??? This could have been a very suttle methode of resolving this question, which went as far as supoeniing a
Supreme Court Judge??? I may be "way out in left field" on this thought, would just like some opinions on this consideration. Thank you
My opinion is that you're being way too generous.
I don't think either man would "goof" intentionally. Roberts was either nervous and/or made the mistake of thinking he knew it well enough to do it from memory. Perhaps he did it with malicious intent, I sincerely hope not.
Roberts is a typical Bush appointee: he screwed up either maliciously or out of incompetence; it has to be one or the other.
Any luck with the birth certificate?
He has an American mother, and therefore is considered by statute to be a natural-born citizen (see 8 U.S.C. § 140, unless you choose to ignore United States law -- case closed, game over, you are the weakest link, bye-bye)
.... any luck with Bush's service records?
If I were appointed to administer the oath of office to a president I'd go over it in my mind dozens of times on the eve of and the day of. The virtue of memorization seems to be lost in modern times. There was a reason we were once taught to memorize poetry and capitals, and it wasn't just about the poetry and the capitals. It's excellent mind exercise and yes, it comes in useful sometimes, too.
If I hadn't seen it for myself I would find it hard to believe that the Chief Justice screwed up the swearing in of a United States president. Another example of how far the bar has been lowered in the last eight years.
The "So help you God" stuck in my craw. But I would suggest that it is no easy thing to be standing there in front of 2 million people and knowing that the eyes of the world are upon you.
I would apply Hanlon's Razor to this situation i.e. "Never attribute to malice that which can be accounted for by stupidity". Roberts was stupid to the extent that he did not take his own possible stage-fright into account. He should have written it down and read it out - no matter how confident he was beforehand that he could administer the oath in his sleep.
In reading some of the comments I would say, when the oath is administered, the words just spoken are repeated when the person administering the oath pauses. Roberts paused before he should - when the stage-fright kicked in - and Obama started repeating what had just been said because of the pause. It went downhill from there.
It is because you will be standing there, in front of 2 million people, that you carefully prepare for the event. There is no good excuse for the blunder, other than stomach flu.
I don't think it shows nervousness or incompetence on Justice Roberts' part. I think it shows deliberate malice. As Chief Supreme Court Justice, Roberts well knows how words can be interpreted different ways, leading to wholly different manifestations in law. He did not "mistakenly" get the wording wrong.
At minimum, he was trying to embarrass or trip up President Obama. The most conspiratorial notion I have is that Roberts, with some of the nattering right wingnuts, intended at a future date to declare this oath invalid, questioning Obama's right to hold the office.
If any of the above is true, then Obama's having retaken the oath today nullifies whatever incompetence, nervousness, or malicious intent Roberts had.
If I hadn't lived through the deliberate malice of the last eight years I would think you're paranoid. Unfortunately, you present a very good case. It is very hard to believe that the Chief Justice is that sloppy in his preparations.
i agree...
either way you slice it it was just a bit of rain on the parade so to speak.
i'm surprised, yet happy, that they re-did it.
Remove? Impeach?
For what? Miss-speaking?
Misspoken words are neither a High Crime nor Misdemeanor.
Embarrassing; sure.
Too bad. It didn't go perfectly. And, ... now it's Presidential Folklore.
End of story.
He's the Chief Justice until he draws his last breath.
Case closed.
The horse is dead. Quit beating it.
John Roberts is no more suited to be the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court (or for that matter, ANY justice of the Supreme Court) than George W. Bush was suited to be the President of the United States. THe BIG difference is Roberts appointment is for life, or such time as he should wish to resign. The country may well be in big, big trouble.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
